breaking news--- airmarshall fires weapon on plane!
- Thread starter posol
- Start date
- Replies 77
- Views 3K
We may earn a small commission from affiliate links and paid advertisements. Terms
Battle Pope
Well-Known Member
Blanco, you're usually a pretty cool guy.
This time, I'm going to have to tell you to get a goddamn grip.
The suspect was in violation of the law. Like it or not, it's called a law for a reason.
Air marshalls are there for situations exactly like this.
Their job is not to decide whether or not this guy is a "real terrorist", their job is to neutralize the percieved threat with as little collateral damage as possible.
Regardless of any post-incident revelations, the meat and potatoes of the situation is that there was a man on this plane that made a threat to the security of everyone onboard. The air marshal's job is to identify, assess, and neutralize the threat, which they did to perfection.
So what if he didn't have a bomb. He claimed to. It's not the air marshal's job to verify that the threat is real, it's his job to eliminate it. The guy said he had a bomb. That's all that matters.
What if he DID have a bomb, and blew up the plane and half of the terminal, killing possibly hundreds of people? You would be breathing fire about the incompetence of the air marshall, the transportation security administration, and the entire government.
You should just be happy that his threats were indeed hollow and that one person is dead versus the several hundred that might be.
This time, I'm going to have to tell you to get a goddamn grip.
The suspect was in violation of the law. Like it or not, it's called a law for a reason.
Air marshalls are there for situations exactly like this.
Their job is not to decide whether or not this guy is a "real terrorist", their job is to neutralize the percieved threat with as little collateral damage as possible.
Regardless of any post-incident revelations, the meat and potatoes of the situation is that there was a man on this plane that made a threat to the security of everyone onboard. The air marshal's job is to identify, assess, and neutralize the threat, which they did to perfection.
So what if he didn't have a bomb. He claimed to. It's not the air marshal's job to verify that the threat is real, it's his job to eliminate it. The guy said he had a bomb. That's all that matters.
What if he DID have a bomb, and blew up the plane and half of the terminal, killing possibly hundreds of people? You would be breathing fire about the incompetence of the air marshall, the transportation security administration, and the entire government.
You should just be happy that his threats were indeed hollow and that one person is dead versus the several hundred that might be.
Battle Pope
Well-Known Member
+1 for the air marshall.
Celerity
Well-Known Member
If you would like the perfect example of the Liberal mindset,
Go to www.cnn.com right now and click the link for the " Watch: Employees fired for smoking -- at home" Link.
I can't paste it here, because it's a java spawn script.
With this, I'm sure the Liberals here could argue in one way, and the conservatives in another way.
This employer says that he is genuinely concerned about his employee's health citing "They'll live longer, be more productive and my insurance will cost less" All good points.
But on the other hand, a conservative will call him Machivellian. Machievellian. Macho Villian. Whatever.
Go to www.cnn.com right now and click the link for the " Watch: Employees fired for smoking -- at home" Link.
I can't paste it here, because it's a java spawn script.
With this, I'm sure the Liberals here could argue in one way, and the conservatives in another way.
This employer says that he is genuinely concerned about his employee's health citing "They'll live longer, be more productive and my insurance will cost less" All good points.
But on the other hand, a conservative will call him Machivellian. Machievellian. Macho Villian. Whatever.
Celerity
Well-Known Member
I disagree with this definition, and I find it's truly left-slanted.
The Conservatives in the american heartland don't give a shit about money, and hate greed. Yet, they still support conservative efforts. Try again.
This is also a good definition, but applied with a Christian slant (It's a christian writer).
You should take all of these writings and ideas and take them openly, and learn to weed out the slanted bullshit from the good stuff:
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=41148
For the record, the terrorists on 9/11/01 told the passengers that everything would be okay and they'd be home for dinner if they listened to them. Look where those flights wound up eating dinner that night, except for one.
Quoted post[/post]]
Funny, I thought he said he was done with this thread?
He also "didn't read any of it after his first post" but he just magically knew that the wind wasn't blowing in his favor in the thread.
I hope this opens many of your eyes of who you agree with and why you agree with them. He urges people to think for themselves but allies himself with people who rely on others to think and perform for them. I know for a fact that I've proven him wrong on multiple occasions and then the topic turns into a hissy fit that goes around the original issue.
This isn't a cutdown but moreso a warning of taking notice who you surround yourself with and what you become from surrounding yourself with them.
My .02 cents.
As for the liberal mindset, I can speak volumes about it but I can also speak volumes about staunch conservatives - in my mind, I begin to side with who I feel is less wrong, because they're obviously incompetent and more importantly ignorant fools if they limit themselves to one line of thinking.
I think I'm going to put some pills in my pocket, walk up to a police officer put my hand in my pants and scream out I HAVE A GUN!!!!!!!!!! then no matter what I will not pull my hand out of my pants, I will then run towards the officer and let the officer shoot me.
Hopfully I wont die, then I can sue becuase I was shot for no good reason, the pills in my pocket are for my (insert mental issue here)
cop gets fired, I get rich. we all win YAY!!!!!!!
is that how you want it to go?
Hopfully I wont die, then I can sue becuase I was shot for no good reason, the pills in my pocket are for my (insert mental issue here)
cop gets fired, I get rich. we all win YAY!!!!!!!
is that how you want it to go?
Battle Pope
Well-Known Member
sounds like a sordid porno
Cashizslick
!i!i!i!i!i!i!i!i!i!i!i!
^ in his def, you would be a model american: sticking up for your rights, voicing your opinion, and collecting from a government employee.
i figured its about time to bump this back to the top
has anyone else noticed that NOT ONE passenger has comfirmed the air marshals story that this man claimed to have a bomb, SHOUTED that he had a bomb...
not one non gov't official has confirmed this story...
so perhaps the hippies were right after all, an innocent mentally ill man was shot in cold blood...
air marshalls a bit jumpy on the trigger finger perhaps?
before you go blasting me i suggest you provide a source of someone that backs the "i have a bomb" theory...
has anyone else noticed that NOT ONE passenger has comfirmed the air marshals story that this man claimed to have a bomb, SHOUTED that he had a bomb...
not one non gov't official has confirmed this story...
so perhaps the hippies were right after all, an innocent mentally ill man was shot in cold blood...
air marshalls a bit jumpy on the trigger finger perhaps?
before you go blasting me i suggest you provide a source of someone that backs the "i have a bomb" theory...
Celerity
Well-Known Member
I'll talk about it.
This is more than itchy trigger finger. Something happened on that flight that goes far beyond our imagination. I think it's something Dean Koontz-style in the works. like the guy knew something.
Infowars actually has a decent theory - That they wanted to bring the panic back up and start banning more and more things in flight ala UK Underground shooting. They shot an innocent man, and it seems that they are doing the same thing (Not talking about it, denying) and it also seems that they did it so they would have an excuse to escalate the panic further and take more and more rights from travellers.
That's why I drive. Tactically.
This is more than itchy trigger finger. Something happened on that flight that goes far beyond our imagination. I think it's something Dean Koontz-style in the works. like the guy knew something.
Infowars actually has a decent theory - That they wanted to bring the panic back up and start banning more and more things in flight ala UK Underground shooting. They shot an innocent man, and it seems that they are doing the same thing (Not talking about it, denying) and it also seems that they did it so they would have an excuse to escalate the panic further and take more and more rights from travellers.
That's why I drive. Tactically.
counter point:
I haven't heard 1 comment from a person on the plane at ALL, let alone backing it up or denying it.
I'm sure the guard just didn't open fire for no reason.
even if he wasn't screaming, he had a backpack on on his chest. i saw the video. if i saw some guy screaming ANYTHING with a backpack on his chest, i'm at least REACHING for my gun. and when he doesn't respond to my command, too bad. take him out.
Retarded or not, he failed etiquette of being at an air port, and it cost him his life.
He should have been escorted by a stuardess much like little kids who fly alone are.
I haven't heard 1 comment from a person on the plane at ALL, let alone backing it up or denying it.
I'm sure the guard just didn't open fire for no reason.
even if he wasn't screaming, he had a backpack on on his chest. i saw the video. if i saw some guy screaming ANYTHING with a backpack on his chest, i'm at least REACHING for my gun. and when he doesn't respond to my command, too bad. take him out.
Retarded or not, he failed etiquette of being at an air port, and it cost him his life.
He should have been escorted by a stuardess much like little kids who fly alone are.
Similar threads
